IN THE HIGH COURT OF JHARKHAND AT RANCHI

A. B.A. No. 4671 of 2022

1. Muskan Praween

2.Shahruk Khan @ Shahrukh Ali @ Amna

….

…..

Petitioners

Versus

1.The State of Jharkhand

2.Aftab Alam

….

….

Opp. Parties

------

CORAM : HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE SUBHASH CHAND

------

For the Petitioners

: Mr. Bijay Kr. Sinha, Advocate

For the State

: Mr. Sunil Kumar Dubey, A.P.P

------

3/19.07.2022

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and learned A.P.P. for

the State.

This anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the

abovenamed applicants seeking anticipatory bail in connection with

Lohardaga P.S. Case No.250 of 2021, registered under Sections 306/34 of the

Indian Penal Code, pending in the court of learned CJM, at Lohardaga.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that as per FIR

allegations the son of the informant was married with 1 and ½ years ago with

Muskan Praween. The wife of the son of the informant had created pressure to

live separately and both resided in a rented house. The wife of the son of the

informant used to harass her on petty matters, as such, the relation between

wife and husband were strained. One day before committing suicide by the

son of the informant, the brother of Muskan Praween namely Shahruk Khan

@ Shahrukh Ali @ Amna had made demand of Rs.20,000/- and in failure he

told to get her sister back to the parental house and on account of torture, the

son of the informant committed suicide.

Learned counsel for the applicants has submitted that both the

applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in this case. The

relation between the wife and husband are alleged to be strained and there is

no evidence in regard to abetting the son of the informant to commit suicide.

It is further submitted that as per information received from the pairwikar both

the applicants are having no criminal antecedent and they have been

implicated in this case with intent to humiliate them. The applicants are

willing to abide all the conditions if enlarged on anticipatory bail.

Learned A.P.P. appearing on behalf of the State vehemently opposed

the contentions made by the learned counsel for the applicants.

In view of the above, no useful purpose would be served in keeping the

present application pending or calling for counter affidavit from the State.

Without expressing any opinion on the merits of the case, the applicants are

entitled to be released on anticipatory bail, at this stage.

In the event of arrest, the above named applicants involved in the

aforesaid case be released on anticipatory bail, on their furnishing bail bond of

Rs.25,000/-(Rupees Twenty Five Thousand) with two sureties of the like

amount each to the satisfaction of the court concerned on the following

conditions :-

i.

The applicants shall make themselves available for interrogation by a

police officer as and when required.

ii.

The applicants shall not, directly or indirectly make any inducement,

threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so

as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the court or any police

officer or tamper with the evidence.

iii.

In default of any of the conditions mentioned above, the investigating

officers shall be at liberty to file appropriate application for cancellation

of anticipatory bail granted to the applicants.

iv.

The applicants shall co-operate in the trial before the court below and in

case of non-cooperation, the trial court would be at liberty to cancel the

bail of the applicants without any reference to this Court.

(Subhash Chand, J.)

Tarun